Monday, September 30, 2013

Northern Irish Protestant charged with hate speech -- but no Muslims have been

Protestant Coalition founder Willie Frazer appeared outside court today dressed as Abu Hamza in a protest against his prosecution under what he called 'hate preaching' laws.

The loyalist leader arrived at Belfast's Laganside court wearing a black robe, skullcap, and fake beard, and he had attached a clothes-hanger hook to one of his hands.

Frazer, 53, who faces charges linked to union flag demonstrations in January, donned the outfit in protest against his prosecution under the Serious Crime Act 2007, which he says was passed to deal with Muslim hate preachers.

In a video statement filmed outside the court, Frazer said: 'I'm the first person within the United Kingdom charged with this law that was brought in to deal with extreme Muslims who were preaching to behead our soldiers.'

'This law was brought in to deal with extreme creatures of hate, Muslim creatures who look to behead British soldiers, and I get charged with it,' he said.

Frazer, from Markethill, Co Armagh, is accused of encouraging others to commit offences in an address to union flag protesters in January.

He also faces charges of three counts of taking part in an unnotified public procession, obstructing traffic in a public place, and possession of a Taser stun-gun.

He was given one week to decide whether to contest the charges and released on bail, the conditions of which were varied to allow him to attend a loyalist parade in Belfast this weekend.

Guido Barilla, chairman of the world's leading pasta manufacturer, prompted calls for a consumer boycott on Thursday after telling Italian radio his company would never use a gay family in its advertising.

"I would never do (a commercial) with a homosexual family, not for lack of respect but because we don't agree with them. Ours is a classic family where the woman plays a fundamental role," Barilla, 55, said in an interview with Radio 24 on Wednesday.

Barilla - one of the best known pasta brands around the world - is one of Italy's biggest advertisers, and for many years has used the image of a happy family living in an idealised version of the Italian countryside, with the slogan: "Where there's Barilla, there's home".

In the interview, Barilla said he opposed adoption by gay parents, but was in favour of allowing gay marriage, which is not legal in Italy. His comment about advertising was in response to a direct question about whether he would ever feature a gay family in his company's commercials.

Aurelio Mancuso, head of gay rights group Equality Italia, said Barilla's comments were an "offensive provocation" and called for a boycott of the company's pasta, sauces and snacks.

Alessandro Zan, a gay member of parliament, said on Twitter: "You can't mess around with consumers, including gay ones."

Barilla issued a statement on Thursday apologising, explaining that he was trying to say "simply that the woman plays a central role in a family."

"Barilla features families in its commercials because it embraces anyone, and they have always been identified with our brand," he said.

Sunday, September 29, 2013

Canadian bigots suppressing Free Speech again

The decision earlier this month by Queen’s University (Kingston, Ontario) to forcibly remove a free-speech wall erected by Queen’s Students for Liberty, on the grounds that the wall contained hate speech, has rallied troops to their respective battle lines. A much-needed intellectual conversation has turned into yet another standoff, with each side claiming to be odds-on-favourite to win in the courts.

For the defence, Queen’s Students for Liberty is backed by the Calgary-based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which says the removal of the free-speech wall was illegal; for the prosecution, Queen’s provost and vice principal (academic) Alan Harrison upholds the decision to remove the wall, telling reporters that the university would take the case to the Supreme Court, if necessary.

This rush to lawyer-up serves only to further distance the issue of freedom of speech from the university campus, which is where the debate over its importance should arguably be most productive.Both Provost Harrison and Principal Daniel Woolf are on record as saying that the free-speech wall contained hate speech.

While both men have acknowledged that free speech issues are inherently controversial and that it is “arguable” where the limits to free speech should be drawn, they have categorically insisted that hate speech is demonstrable in this case.

Moreover, it seems that there are reasonable grounds to consider (or at least discuss) why offensive content on a temporary free speech wall is summarily purged when similarly offensive language and ideas are permanently accessible through university libraries. Consider, for example, The Satanic Verses, The Mischievous Nigger, Mein Kampf, or any of the 20-plus titles by Susan Sontag, who once called the white race “the cancer of human history.”

Since Principal Woolf has made it clear that “demeaning each other based on race, religion or any other affiliation will not be tolerated,” we might also consider what to do with the posters urging us to “eat the rich” that have of late circulated around campus.

British supermarket has an 'inflatable g*y best friend' in its online store

Sometimes "gay" is a good word and sometimes it is bad. It's hard to predict

Just a day after Tesco was criticised for selling a 'Psycho Ward' costume, an 'inflatable gay best friend' has been discovered in its online store, with the word gay asterisked out.

Twitter users have reacted with fury at the censorship, questioning why the word has been deemed offensive.

The description for the product reads: 'Although not much can be said for his own attire, your Inflatable g*y Best Friend is ready to give you fashion advice, tell you if your bum looks big and b**ch about everyone who doesn't wear Jimmy Choo's.'

A Tesco spokesperson said: 'This product was uploaded to the website by a third party seller but was removed from sale immediately because we found it offensive.

Friday, September 27, 2013

Should you have fewer rights than the New York Times?

"The Senate will soon vote on the 'Free Flow of Information Act.' While it claims to 'protect' journalists from being forced to reveal whistleblowers, it won't protect YOU. Shouldn't you enjoy the same freedoms as The New York Times? Or does the First Amendment list exceptions?"

A PASSENGER claims he was told he couldn’t board his flight after posting a Tweet critical of the airline.

Mark Leiser, a law lecturer at Strathclyde University, was waiting for his delayed easyJet flight from Glasgow to London, and became concerned he would miss his connecting train.

The flight was over an hour late, so he approached a staff member about his concerns but was allegedly told it wasn’t their problem.

The employee then mentioned that there was someone in the military who may also miss their connection.

It was at this point that Leiser decided to take to Twitter to complain about the delay.

He told The Independent: “She implied that if easyJet wasn’t able to do anything for him if he might miss his boat, then they definitely weren’t going to do anything for me. “It was at that point I sent the Tweet. I wasn’t concerned for me but if this guy might miss his boat which was potentially disembarking into a war zone because he had relied on easyJet then I thought put pressure on them to do something about it.”

But later on, when in the boarding queue, the same staff member allegedly approached him and pulled him out of the line.

“She pulled me out the line which was embarrassing,” Mr Leiser said. “Then she told me they were not going to let me get on this flight because of the Tweet I sent. The manager then came over and told the woman to check if I had any bags on board.

“They asked to see the Tweet and said to save it and that I was not to delete it.”

He claims the manager then said he should know better than to send Tweets like that and think he can still board the flight.

Ironically, Leiser had been working on a lecture he was due to give next week on free speech and social media while he waited at the airport. So he responded that it was free speech and that he was a lawyer, flashing his ID from university.

“At this point everyone else had boarded and I said to him that he needed to make up his mind whether I would be allowed on the flight or not,” he said.

“He then asked the woman if I did have any bags on board but decided to let me on the flight. He only really let me on the flight because I flashed my law lecturing ID and I don’t like doing that.”

Thursday, September 26, 2013

New California regulation on political bloggers will chill free speech

Yesterday the California Fair Political Practices Commission approved a dangerous regulation that will subject political bloggers to disclosure rules.

The regulation forces campaign committees to report on their campaign finance statements the names of people they pay to post “favorable or unfavorable” political messages about “a candidate or ballot measure” on a website, blog, social media platform, or online video. They must also report how much they paid the person and the name of the website where the content first appears.

The regulation will be a compliance and paperwork nightmare in the age of the Internet when ideas embedded in blogs, tweets, and videos are ubiquitous. The Commission will be able to pick and choose “compliance violations” to fine based on the Commission’s political leanings. Violations by friendlies will be overlooked; violations by enemies will be punished.

But most important the regulation will have a chilling effect on people who want to support causes they believe in yet they want to remain anonymous or keep their personal finances private.

Universities are supposed to be safe places to debate controversial ideas but school administrators and students leaders would sometimes prefer instead to enforce their own points of view, even if it means silencing others.

As a result, the limits of free speech are frequently debated on campus. This week it’s at the University of Manitoba where a pro-life group is showing photos comparing abortion to the Holocaust and Rwandan genocide. Student Ashley James told the Winnipeg Free Press that it’s preventing her from focusing at school.

One can bet where the Calgary-based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms would stand. They want controversial speech protected. According to their 2013 Campus Freedom Index, released Tuesday, 23 of the 45 universities graded this year have failed to stop censorship. Each administration and student union was assigned two A to F letter grades, one based on policies and the other on practices. Their conclusion: “Our country’s institutions of higher education have failed in their promise to uphold the sanctity of free speech in its most cherished and necessary form: the discussion of controversial ideas, frank and spirited debate, and the pursuit of truth.”

The most common limits on free speech cited in the report were those placed on anti-abortion groups by student unions. The report quotes the Trent Central Students Association’s strange explanation for rejecting a pro-life club: “Campaigning for pro life or pro choice [sic] is not allowed on campus… since there is [sic] so many opinions to this it can lead to a very exclusive group, while all groups at Trent must be inclusive.” It also quotes the Brandon University Students’ Union which said it wouldn’t certify a pro-life group because, “[it] would be redundant since the Women’s Collective deals with all gender issues.” Student unions also hindered pro-life groups at York, Memorial, Calgary, Guelph and Lakehead, to name a few. On the other hand, the University of British Columbia administration got an “A” after it lifted restrictions on the pro-life club Lifeline.

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Free Speech Is So Annoying to Elected Officials

Corsi lives in Geauga County, Ohio, where he strives to be a burr under the saddle of public officials who disregard the Constitution, which to Corsi means most of them. So a few years ago he started a blog (why should he be different?) and got together with a couple of like-minded folks. The called themselves the Geauga Constitutional Council.

One day Corsi was handing out pamphlets at a county fair. One of the people who took a flyer was Ed Ryder, a Republican and a member of the local Board of Elections. Corsi didn’t have much nice to say about Ryder. So Ryder did what any petty Napoleon would do: He went after Corsi using Ohio’s campaign-finance laws.

Long story short: Because Corsi spent money, no matter how little (his website cost all of $40), the Ohio Election Commission said Corsi should have incorporated his group and registered with the state as a political action committee — hiring a lawyer to help with the “very complicated” process. As far as Ohio is concerned a political action committee can consist of as few as two people. Besides, Corsi engaged in “express advocacy” about politicians. The horror.

Two courts have ruled in the commission’s favor. The Center for Competitive Politics, which is based in Arlington, has asked the Supreme Court to hear Corsi’s case. Let’s hope the justices agree to do so, because the Corsi case epitomizes a growing problem: the censoring of free speech through back-door regulation.

"Here’s one to quack home about. Virginia high school student Hunter Spain was told by his school to turn inside-out or remove his 'Duck Dynasty' T-shirt because officials said its slogan implies the threat of violence.

WWBT 12 reports the T-shirt, recently worn by Si Robertson, one of the A&E hit show’s rambunctious personalities, has the words, 'I Will Hurt You Physically and Metaphysically,' upon it.

'Duck Dynasty' follows the lives of bearded millionaires who run a duck-call business"

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

THE Australian Broadcasting Corporation has launched an investigation into the final episode of The Hamster Decides 12 days ago, following complaints about a segment involving journalist Chris Kenny.

Kenny, a Sky News presenter and associate editor of The Australian, was depicted as having intercourse with a dog while strangling it. The segment then showed the doctored picture of Kenny again, with the label "dog f . . ker".

Jennifer Collins, the head of entertainment, television told Media Watch the segment was not referred upwards as "it had a clear editorial purpose". The ABC declined to elaborate on what was the "clear editorial purpose" of depicting a journalist, known for being critical of the ABC, having sex with an animal. The piece drew complaints from viewers and is now being investigated by the ABC's audience and consumer affairs division.

Nigeria's national football coach, Stephen Keshi, is in the middle of a race row. Keshi got into a public altercation with Malawi national team coach, Tom Saintfie, a Belgian, over suitability of a match venue for a crucial World Cup qualifier.

Saintfie wanted to petition Fifa to move the match from Calahar, a southeastern city in Nigeria, citing safety concerns. Keshi was not pleased and fired a racist remark; "If he wants to talk to Fifa, he should go back to Belgium. He is not an African person, he is a white dude, he should go back to Belgium."

No prizes for guessing how Saintfiet received the remarks. He did not take Keshi's comments kindly and has reported him to Fifa accusing Keshi of racism.Fifa has been campaigning to kick out racism from the sport, but the template case that Fifa and high profile football associations have been dealing with are usually cases of black people as the victims and white players or fans as the offenders. This case is therefore unusual.

If Saintfiet had said, "Keshi is a black dude, who should go back to Nigeria," your guess is as good as mine. He would been disgraced for a lifetime. Saintfiet was quoted as saying, "If Fifa takes racism seriously, then you have to take it seriously in both directions. If a European said something of this nature about an African, you would have a huge problem." Many will be following this case with keen interest. By the way Keshi is still in charge of the national team.

Monday, September 23, 2013

Banana racism

Weeks after an Italian Cabinet minister of African descent had a banana thrown at her, a far more prominent black politician was apparently racially slurred with a photoshopped image linking him with the yellow fruit.

A pro-Kremlin Russian MP named Irina Rodnina tweeted a photo (since deleted from her account) which showed a picture of U.S. President Barack Obama and his wife Michelle attending some public function (probably a sporting event), with a banana mysteriously hanging in front of them.

Linking bananas to black people is considered extremely insulting and inflammatory, but has become a regular feature of life in Europe, especially on soccer pitches where black and African players are frequently taunted with bananas. And in late July, a banana was thrown at Italy’s Congolese-born Integration Minister, Cecile Kyenge, during a political rally.

Apparently there is some belief that monkeys eat bananas. But since the vast majority of the world's bananas are eaten by human beings, this is at least not a clever slur. I would be more inclined to link Obama with jellyfish.

"Five easy pieces" refers to classical music and is the name of a classic Hollywood movie so I think you would have to be a Canadian to find mention of it offensive

At least one member of Saskatoon band, The Sheepdogs, is standing by a T-shirt that is generating some controversy online.

It's a picture of an aboriginal man wearing a headdress with the words "five easy pieces".

In an email statement, bassist Ryan Gullen said, " The shirt was actually designed in NY by our label as a limited run. It was one of the designs we picked because we thought it was a powerful image. I have many relatives and friends who are also First Nations. In no way, shape, or form is it meant to be derogatory. Thanks for the opportunity to let us comment."

Some people have commented on the Sheepdogs' Facebook page, calling the T-shirt derogatory and racist.

Sheila Poorman of the Kawacatoose First Nation said people are making too big of a deal out of a T-shirt. "If we could learn to stop with the racism card all the time, then we would get a lot farther," she said. She said people are easily offended by logos that include First Nations.

Sunday, September 22, 2013

California college bars student from handing out copies of Constitution

The Constitution guarantees the right to free speech, but don’t try to pass out copies of it at Modesto Junior College in California.

A student at the school who tried to pass out pocket-size pamphlets of the very document that memorializes our rights got shut down on Sept. 17 – a date also known as Constitution Day.

Campus authorities told 25-year-old Robert Van Tuinen, who caught the whole thing on videotape, he could only pass out the free documents at a tiny designated spot on campus, and only then if he scheduled it several days in advance.

“Watching the video is a combination of depressing and nauseating, to see what rigamarole students have to go through just to express themselves on campus,” said Robert Shibley, senior vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which has taken on campus speech codes around the nation.

Van Tuinen, who said he’d read up on the school’s regulations and expected to get chased away from outside the student center, went to FIRE with the video. The foundation penned an email letter to the school’s administration on Van Tuinen’s behalf early Thursday, but Shibley said there had been no response later in the day.

A spokeswoman for the college tells FoxNews.com that students and the general public are permitted to pass out materials in areas on campus that are generally available to the public, as long as they do not disrupt the orderly operations of the college.

"In the case of the YouTube video, it does not appear that the student was disrupting the orderly operations of the college and therefore we are looking into the incident," Modesto Junior College Marketing and Public Relations officer Linda Hoile said.

In the video, Van Tuinen is confronted by an unidentified campus police officer within minutes of passing out the pamphlets. When he protests, he is told “there are rules.”

“But do you know what this is?” he asks. “What are the rules? Why are the rules tied to my free speech?”

"It was a tense situation," Van Tuinen, who is from Modesto, told FoxNews.com. "To be told I can't do something as basic as handing out the Constitution was frustrating."

Eventually, the police officer escorts Van Tuinen into an administrative office, where an unidentified woman shows him a binder with rules she says govern free speech on campus

Speaking at a Tory event in Windsor, he said: ‘The person who was actually in charge of family policy amongst the ministerial team at the DfE was Sarah Teather. Which was a bit difficult because she doesn't really believe in family.

‘She certainly didn't produce one of her own. So it became a bit of a family-free zone. I think that is a huge disappointment,’ the father-of-three said

Brown British footballer receives a foul-mouthed rant from American woman for under-tipping

Ashley Cole suffered a foul-mouthed tirade from an American woman for reportedly not tipping well enough at a U.S. bar.

The incident happened when Cole, 32, was in St Louis for Chelsea’s post-season double header against Manchester City back in May.

Outside a Missouri bar where the defender and his mates were enjoying a quite drink, the woman confronted the group, and told Ashley: 'I hope this stupid a** gets robbed, gets beat, gets raped right here on the motherf****** sidewalk.'

The Chelsea star kept relatively calm as the woman continued her X-rated rant, and at one point asked: ‘Why are you getting so angry with me? No-one knows.’

One hopes management has by now fired the aggressive female bartender. Who would go back to that business after encountering her?

Tipping is a rather vexed matter these days. Gone is the old 10% and even 15% is considered too low by some these days. Cole probably followed the English custom, which is still around 10%. How much simpler it is in places like Australia and Japan where there is no custom of tipping.

Thursday, September 19, 2013

David Cameron has unexpectedly become embroiled in football’s latest race row by arguing that it is acceptable for Tottenham Hotspur fans to chant the word “Yid”.

The Prime Minister’s entry into the debate follows a Football Association statement last week which warned that fans chanting the word “Yid” could face criminal charges and long banning orders.

Cameron, though, drew the distinction between the context of how fans use the term. Tottenham, who have a strong Jewish following, have been regularly subjected to anti-Semitic abuse from opposition fans, notably last season against West Ham United.

In what has been described by the club as a “defence mechanism”, fans have regularly used the word “Yid” themselves, with chants of “Yid Army” and “Yiddos” regularly sung from the home stands at White Hart Lane.

Asked whether Tottenham fans should be prosecuted for using the term, Cameron told the Jewish Chroni­cle: “You have to think of the mens rea. There’s a difference between Spurs fans self-describing themselves as Yids and someone calling someone a Yid as an insult. You have to be motivated by hate. Hate speech should be prosecuted but only when it’s motivated by hate.”

Refreshing to hear some commonsense -- and from the PM too! He is an economist, not a lawyer so it is interesting that he uses a Latin legal term, "mens rea" (= "intention", roughly). He is a bright boy.

South Carolina residents were outraged after the woman who represented them in Sunday’s Miss America pageant suggested that 20 percent of them live in a trailer.

“I’m from the state where 20 percent of our homes are mobile because that’s how we roll,” said Miss South Carolina, Brooke Mosteller, from Mount Pleasant.

The show began with the traditional parade of states, in which each contestant briefly introduces herself and her state, usually in an attention-grabbing manner, The State first reported.

But regardless of whether a beauty contest is the appropriate venue to broach such a statistic, Miss South Carolina wasn’t far off: In 2008, the U.S. Census Bureau recorded 17.9 percent of the state’s residents living in mobile homes, making it No. 1 in the country.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Aggressive and disrespectful advocacy has long been part of sport but the censors are now squashing that too

A Louisiana State University fraternity which posted an offensive sign before last weekend's LSU football game vs. Kent State has replaced it with another apologizing for anyone offended.

WVLA TV in Baton Rouge reported that it was the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity that posted the sign that said, "Getting massacred is nothing new to Kent St." Pictures of the sign were distributed around the Internet on Sunday, drawing negative feedback.

By Sunday night, the station had pictures of the fraternity displaying a new sign saying, "We would like to apologize."

The original sign referenced the May 4, 1970, incident on Kent State's campus when Ohio National Guardsmen fired on anti-war protesters, killing four students and injuring nine.

Kent State released a statement on Sunday through university spokesman Eric Mansfield which read: "May 4, 1970, was a watershed moment for the country and especially the Kent State family. We lost four students that day while nine others were wounded and countless others were changed forever.

"We take offense to the actions of a few people last night who created an inappropriate sign and distracted from the athletic contest on the field.

Advancing their quest for “common sense press control,” the Senate Judiciary Committee voted yesterday to define who the government will consider to be an “Authorized Journalist,” meaning if the measure becomes law, they will also be able to declare who is not.

Defining "covered journalists" as those who are “an employee, independent contractor or agent of an entity that disseminates news or information,” the bill would also “extend to student journalists,” the report continues, meaning it will also codify who is an “Authorized Student.”

That this particular triumvirate sees itself as the arbiters of not just government declaring who merits elite “more equal than others” recognition, but as vested with legitimate Constitutional powers to make such a determination backed by force of law in the first damn place, is hardly surprising. After all, the Second Amendment isn’t safe around them either, so why would people think other freedoms would be?

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Black Gun Owners Slam Funny or Die’s ‘Black NRA’ Parody

In case you missed it, last week Funny or Die produced a video in which comedian Sarah Silverman, among others, facetiously advocated for a black NRA. It wasn’t funny, but racist and ignorant, as Katie pointed out.

But don’t think the black, gun-owning community let this one slide. NRA commentator Colion Noir and PJTV’s AlfonZo Rachel both took their turn condemning the ‘black NRA’ video—and they’re well worth watching.

“Everyone in this video is guilty of promoting the idea that all young black men are criminals to be feared, because God forbid the Second Amendment apply to everyone, that would mean even young black men can own guns, too, and obviously that should scared every white person in America to vouch for gun control,” Noir says. “Are there white people who don’t want black people to own guns? Yes, and their names are Mayor Bloomberg and Dianne Feinstein…last I checked, the NRA advocated gun rights for everyone.”

A Christian street preacher was arrested and jailed last week in England after he was accused by a lesbian bystander of engaging in hate speech against homosexuals.

The incident occurred on Thursday while evangelist Rob Hughes was preaching on the streets of Basildon, Essex.

As he spoke, Hughes was approached by police, who advised that they had received a complaint that Hughes had engaged in hate speech by preaching against homosexuality. Police advised that such speech was a violation of the Public Order Act, Section 5, which bans “threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior, or disorderly behavior” or the display of “any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting” within earshot of sight of a person “likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.”

As Hughes was interviewed by police on street, his friend, Andrew Noble, was also interrogated by officers. “Did you say that homosexuality is sinful?” Noble remembers the police inquiring.

“I don’t think we said that today, but it is something that we would say,” he replied.

Noble told Christian News Network that a lesbian bystander had lodged a complaint against Hughes’ speech and falsely accused him of speaking against homosexual behavior.

Hughes was arrested on the street and transported to the local jail, where he was then fingerprinted and held in a cell. In the meantime, Noble contacted the Christian legal organization Christian Concern to request emergency assistance.

Seven hours later, at nearly midnight, Hughes was released and the charges were dismissed. Hughes told Christian Concern that Christian street preachers are facing a situation where they are now becoming ”presumed guilty until found to be innocent.”

Monday, September 16, 2013

Two employees at a North Dakota barbecue restaurant have been fired after a Facebook post suggesting Native Americans are bad tippers went viral.

The post included a photograph of Andrea Casson, a worker at Famous Dave's in Bismarck, holding a cardboard sign that says: 'Spare change? Help, I'm a server at Famous Dave's on Pow Wow weekend. Anything helps! 5c, 25c! It's more than my tips.'

The United Tribes International Pow Wow, held last weekend in Bismark, is an annual festival that attracts tens of thousands of Native Americans to the area.

Casson was pictured in the restaurant wearing her uniform. She and the employee who took the photo were both fired. The other employee hasn't been named.

'Like many employers, we employ many people. People have opinions. Social media allows an outlet for these opinions,' owner Mike Wright said in a statement on Facebook.

'Sadly, for reasons unknown to me, often times bitter employees also try to embarrass the employers and taint the businesses where they work. Clearly a recent post by a now former employee fits this description.'

Leftists believe that only they are entitled to use force against their political enemies: Everyone else must obey the law. Pinochet said "Phooey" to that and answered Marxist urban terror with terror. He killed a couple of thousand but that is nothing compared to the millions that Marxists murder

The point below about the ousting of Marxist President Allende is correct. Leftists always pass over it in silence but the fact is that General Pinochet removed Allende at the express request of the Chilean parliament -- because Allende was riding roughshod over Chilean law

There are calls for a senior New South Wales Liberal MP to be reprimanded over a speech defending the late Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.

The State Government's Upper House whip, Peter Phelps spoke in State Parliament to mark the 40th anniversary of Pinochet's overthrow of Chilean president Salvador Allende.

"There are many who believe that General Pinochet was a reluctant hero, a morally courageous man," Dr Phelps told Parliament.

"We have to accept that sometimes it's necessary to do bad things to prevent terrible things.

"It's all too easy to say we believe we should never sanction dictatorship or that we should have no truck with evil, but such principles are foolish and self defeating in the real world.

"Yes, Pinochet killed people and if you know of any way to overthrow a government other than military force then let me hear about it."

In the aftermath of the 1973 coup d'état several thousand of Pinochet's political opponents were killed and tens of thousands more tortured and imprisoned.

Greens MP John Kaye has called on Premier Barry O'Farrell to reprimand Dr Phelps over his comments, saying they are highly offensive to those scarred by the Pinochet regime. "It is extraordinary that a senior Government position holder is justifying the very worst kind of terrorisms," Dr Kaye said.

The Opposition is calling for Dr Phelps to be sacked over his speech while Elizabeth Riviera, a member of Sydney's Chilean community, is outraged..

But Dr Phelps has rejected the suggestion he condoned any atrocities.

"What I did last night was defend the decision to remove Allende's regime, which is entirely justified if you look at the supreme court and the chamber of deputy decisions in relation to the Allende government," he said.

"At no time did I defend the regime and indicated my disgust at the number of people who'd been killed by him."

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Australia: Must not speak of an 'All-Asian Mall' on TV

Even if there are a lot of East Asians there

Tracy Grimshaw is expected to apologise on Friday night on behalf of the Nine Network for a segment that aired on A Current Affair, which has been found to have breached the television code of practice.

The story by ACA reporter Ben McCormack, titled "All-Asian Mall", aired on the show in November last year and gave the impression that Asian shopkeepers were "taking over" a shopping centre in Castle Hill, Sydney.

Following on from complaints from viewers, the Australian Communication and Media Authority (ACMA) found the segment breached three clauses of the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice, including containing inaccurate factual material and placing gratuitous emphasis on ethnic origin.

Despite not having the authority to force Nine to make an apology, the ACMA recommended Nine make a statement on air, correcting the story, and pull the segment from its website. Nine has agreed to both measures.

The program was inaccurate in that only a minority of the shops were Asian but that was only part of the criticism. Just singling out Asians at all was condemned as inflamatory. I quote:

"ACMA also found that the story portrayed people of Asian ethnicity in a negative light by placing gratuitous emphasis on Asian ethnicity in contrast with Australian nationality. In addition, the story was likely to have provoked intense dislike or serious contempt"

The NFL team from Washington D.C. will wear uniforms that contain a moniker that even Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines as being “usually offensive” to Native-American ethnic groups. The team will also wear helmets that bear a stereotypical image of Native Americans.

Yet, rather than fine the Washington D.C. team owner, Daniel Snyder, for his use of an ethnic slur and require him to attend the same sensitivity training program as Cooper, Commissioner Goodell instead penned a letter to Congress proclaiming that the team name “Redskins” actually “stands for strength, courage, pride and respect” rather than for the scalps of murdered Native-Americans, as the term has historically been used.

While it is easy to understand why NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is reluctant to tell one of his 32 employers that he must change his team name, the NFL as an organization needs to decide whether it wants to uniformly enter to 21st century and stand up against hate speech, or instead to remain a relic of the American past when both the n-word and the R-word were used without proper rebuke in certain regions of our country.

Thursday, September 12, 2013

"Illegal" a bad word -- particularly if it is accurate

Last week The Huffington Post published an article regarding the University of California at Los Angeles’ ban on the term “illegal immigrant.” In putting this ban in place, the university joined the ranks of some of the United States’ most acclaimed news networks, including the Associated Press, CNN, ABC News and NBC news.

The weird part? I never knew “illegal immigrant” was problematic.

What’s wrong with it? It’s accurate, unlike the partially taboo “Indian,” so why have numerous institutions and organizations placed a ban on it? The reason seems obvious: The truth hurts. Let’s try not to offend.

Great, there’s another one to add to the never-ending vortex of political correctness.

Where does it ever end? According to the Global Language Monitor, it’s becoming less acceptable to say “Columbus Day,” something I’ve noticed on my own. These past few years, more and more people have bitterly wished me, “Happy Bring-Smallpox-to-Millions-of-People-and-Wipe-Out-Whole-Civilizations Day.”

Well, that’s a downer. (By the way, the alternate — and supposedly more acceptable term — is Explorer’s Day.)

A few weeks ago a CNBC reporter caused a stir during a discussion of the pending divorce of Wendi Deng and media mogul Rupert Murdoch. The reporter referred to Ms. Deng's lawyer as having a knack for identifying gaps in his adversaries' defenses.

But the reporter did not speak of "gaps" in "defenses." Rather, he used an idiom that includes a word that happens to be a homophone, or indeed a homograph, for a particular racial pejorative.

The Asian-American Journalists Association called the comment "offensive."

The Economist's language blog, "Johnson," is willing to give the CNBC man a pass, in part because the phrase made no semantic sense as a racial slur. By contrast, when ESPN used the same phrase in connection with basketball star Jeremy Lin, in a context in which it did make semantic sense, the editor responsible was fired – rightly so, says "Johnson."

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Toys R Us agree to drop sexist labelling of girls' and boys' toys after mounting pressure from campaign group

Retail giant Toys R Us has agreed to drop sexist marketing and gender stereotyping of its products to girls and boys.

The toy store has bowed to pressure from campaign group Let Toys Be Toys, who represent thousands of shoppers concerned with sexism in the toy industry and the impact it's having on children.

After meeting with campaigners, the chain have said they will now ensure their marketing is more inclusive, as well as removing explicit references to gender in store.

The toy giant's adverts will show boys and girls playing with the same toys, such as kitchens, toy guns and Lego, and they have promised to review the way toys are represented in their upcoming Christmas catalogue.

All have agreed to banish 'girls' and 'boys' signs from their aisles following intervention from campaigners.

The kids will make their own choices -- and boys will like they have always liked -- and girls will like what they have always liked. It's not shops that stereotype boys and girls. They stereotype themselves. The right stuff for each kid will be a bit harder to find now. That's all

Florida official tells Christian charity to choose between Jesus and cheese‏

A Florida ministry that feeds the poor said a state agriculture department official told them they would not be allowed to receive USDA food unless they removed portraits of Christ, the Ten Commandments, a banner that read “Jesus is Lord” and stopping giving Bibles to the needy.

“They told us they could no longer allow us to have any religious information where the USDA food is going to be,” said Kay Daly, executive director of the Christian Service Center.

So why did the government have an issue with the religious group’s religious decorations? A spokesperson for the Florida Department of Agriculture told me they were following the guidelines written by the USDA.

“This program is a USDA-funded program and the requirements were outlined by the USDA,” spokesperson Amanda Bevis said. “This agency administers the program on the state level. Our staff did provide a briefing to CSC following turnover in leadership at CSC and did review the USDA requirements.”

A USDA spokesperson told me that “under current law, organizations that receive USDA nutrition assistance can still engage in religious activities so long as the activity is not used to create a barrier to eligible individuals receiving food.”

The USDA referred to an Executive Order providing equal protection for faith-based organizations. That order guarantees those groups the right to provide assistance without “removing or altering religious art, icons, scriptures or other symbols from these facilities.”

For the past 31 years, the Christian ministry has been providing food to the hungry in Lake City, Fla. without any problems. But all that changed when they said a state government worker showed up to negotiate a new contract.

So in a spirit of Christian love and fellowship, Daly politely told the government what they could do with their cheese. “We decided to eliminate the USDA food and we’re going to trust God to provide,” she told me. “If God can multiply fish and loaves for 10,000 people, he can certainly bring in food for our food pantry so we can continue to feed the hungry.”

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

"Orient" is a bad word?

The term "Orient" just means "the East", usually in relation to Europe, and derives from a Latin word meaning "where the sun rises"

Its creator has called it "one of the great untold stories of the twentieth century" but the forthcoming Australian-made computer game Whore of The Orient has been slammed by a prominent member of the Australian-Chinese community as an "attempt to disgrace Chinese culture, history and traditions".

What's worse, says 28-year-old Jieh-Yung Lo, it is using government money to do so. The O-word is very similar to the N-word for African-American communities.

"The most shocking revelation is that [game developer] Team Bondi received $200,000 from Screen New South Wales to develop the project," said Mr Lo, who has vowed to take his complaint to the Human Rights Commission on grounds of racial vilification.

The game is the brainchild of Brendan McNamara, who founded Team Bondi in 2003. It is being anticipated as a sequel of sorts to that company's LA Noire, the first-person interactive detective story set in Los Angeles in the 1940s. That game has been a huge success, reportedly selling more than 5 million copies since its release in May 2011,

The outburst came in response to a newspaper article in which Edmondson criticised Davidson as being ‘racist’, ‘homophobic’ and ‘dull’.

Davidson posted a message on his website stating that he’d seen Edmondson criticising him, adding: ‘Getting a slagging from the unfunniest man in the world is funny, eh? I’ve never liked that arrogant self-satisfied lefty, and I am so glad I get up his snooty nose.

Edmondson previously complained that Davidson embodied the kind of comedy which he hates, and which inspired his own ‘alternative’ stance in the 1980s. He said: ‘Comedy on TV was mainly men in dickie bows telling racist and homophobic gags – they were all like Jim Davidson. It was kind of dull.’

Five-times married Davidson has previously appeared on a TV cookery show himself – Hell’s Kitchen in 2007 – but was axed after making homophobic comments in which he branded gay men ‘shirtlifters’.

Monday, September 09, 2013

Sounds like a useful thing to me. There's no doubt that some areas are much more dangerous than others -- and locals know best

A website and app called "Ghetto Tracker", designed to help people avoid going to the "bad" part of town has been taken down after it was attacked on Twitter for being racist.

Featuring a smiling white family on the home page, Ghetto Tracker purported to be an innocent travel tool for wary tourists wanting to keep out of trouble.

It posed the questions, "Travelling to a new city? Will you be visiting a safe part of town?" and the reassurance, "Ghetto Tracker can help determine which parts of town are safe and which parts are not."

The way the app worked was to allow locals to rate the safety of different parts of a given area.

The site appeared last weekend, and within 24 hours it was causing a stir on Twitter, with tweets from Americans accusing it of playing on people's fears and, Gawker said, being "a racist, classist app for helping the rich to avoid the poor".

Apart from the racist associations of the site's name - a ghetto is traditionally a poor area inhabited by African Americans, people were angry the site appeared to allow anyone to arbitrarily decide which neighbourhoods were good or bad, rather than rely on crime statistics.

Cricket Australia boss James Sutherland has condemned "bigoted" comments about spinner Fawad Ahmed, after former rugby international David Campese said he should "go home" if he didn't want to wear a beer sponsor's logo on his playing shirt.

Campese was commenting on a story that appeared in The Daily Telegraph, in which former Test batsman Doug Walters was quoted as saying: "I think if he doesn't want to wear the team gear, he should not be part of the team. Maybe if he doesn't want to be paid that's OK."

Campese tweeted: "Doug Walters tells Pakistan-born Fawad Ahmed: if you don't like the VB uniform, don't play for Australia Well said doug. Tell him to go home."

Ahmed was granted refugee protection in Australia on the basis that Taliban commanders in his homeland threatened on multiple occasions to kill him for coaching local children and promoting education free from religious extremism for women and girls.

He was granted permanent residency in Australia in November and became an Australian citizen in July. Sutherland said the comments were "out of order" and a poor reflection on Australian society.

Sunday, September 08, 2013

British High School pupil reported to police and his future university by headmaster after he criticised school

A London headteacher reported an A-Level student to police and informed the university he had applied for that the teenager had succumbed to 'violent extremism' after he criticised the school in a blog.

Jacques Szemalikowski, the headmaster of Hampstead School, told 19-year-old Kinnan Zaloom never to return to the school grounds again after he set up a website attacking the way it was run.

And he informed the school's on-site policemen and Glasgow University, where Mr Zaloom hoped to take a degree, that the student could be 'developing into an anarchist.

The Hampstead Trash, which Mr Zaloom started in February, contained a series of colourfully-worded articles that likened the school staff to characters in George Orwell's anti-totalitarian novels - most notably casting Mr Szemalikowski in the role of Animal Farm's chief pig, Napoleon.

In a style that he likened to that of the irreverent satirical magazine Private Eye, the young blogger accused the school of failing to push GCSE results any higher, a lack of investment in musical instruments and gym equipment, and of not listening to pupils' views.

Mr Szemaliskowski said he was particularly concerned 'that Kinnan has mentioned the ideologies of anarchism and individualism on this blog'.

'I must do something,' he said. 'In the last year he has become more and more enchanted by anti-establishment ways of thinking and has even said that there is an inherent risk that every government is corrupt.

Mr Zaloom, who co-founded a debating society at the school, compared his treatment to those fighting for press freedom in the Middle East.

He said: 'Obviously it’s not on the same scale at all, this injustice is small, I know that. But my family are from Jordan so I know how things work there, and newspapers are not allowed to write what they want.

This sounds like Spanish machismo. Machismo is common in Mediterranean countries where families are dominated by mothers. The teenage son engages in exaggerated displays of masculinity and bravado to pretend that he is not dominated by his mother. It is childish and insecure.

Friday, September 06, 2013

City Leaders Object to Church’s Cross

When the Left are as far as possible pushing Christianity out of public view, large crosses are one way of making sure they do not succeed

It’s a battle of Christians versus Christians in Brandon, Miss. where city officials oppose efforts by a prominent church to erect a giant cross because it violates a zoning ordinance. But the pastor of the church said elected officials are also afraid the cross might offend Muslims.

The First Baptist Church of Brandon petitioned the city to install a 110-foot tall cross on its property alongside Interstate 20. The project is sponsored by “Crosses Across America,” a non-profit group that builds giant crosses along the nation’s highways.

“They were led by the Holy Spirit to seek a location in Mississippi,” Pastor Scott Thomas told Fox News. “92,000 cars a day travel along the Interstate 20 corridor. Those are people who need hope, who need inspiration.”

The Federal Aviation Administration and the Mississippi Department of Transportation signed off on the plan, but the church hit a snag when they took their request before the city’s planning commission. They voted 4-3 to not recommend construction.

Mayor Butch Lee told Fox News the cross is considered an auxiliary structure and under the law the cross can only be 20 feet high.

“The tallest structure in the city is two stories,” the mayor said. “The cross is 11 stories.”

The final decision on the cross rests with the board of alderman and Pastor Thomas said the outlook is bleak. He said he suspects there’s more to their objections than just the size of the cross.

“They asked other questions that indicate to me that there’s something else that concerns them,” he said. “They asked, ‘what if the Muslims, the Buddhists want to build a sign?’”

Pastor Thomas said the city did offer to let them build a smaller cross.

“They said they would allow a 50-foot cross but they would not allow a 110-foot cross,” he said. “Our problem with that is that we want to make an impact. We want to make a statement. And it’s on church property.”

THE following adjudication has been issued by the Australian Press Council:

The Press Council has considered a complaint about an article published on the news.com.au site on 23 November 2012, titled "Autistic man convicted of murdering WA mum". It concerned the conviction on that day of a man for the murder of his mother.

The first sentence read: "An autistic Perth man has been convicted of murdering his mother whose body has never been found". A later passage stated that he "stood in the dock and kept his head down during the proceedings, as he has done during most of his trial and court appearances. Justice McKechnie described [the man] as 'unusual' and ordered both a psychiatric and psychological report ahead of sentencing." The judge made no reference on that day to the man's autism but seven months earlier his autism had been discussed in a separate hearing on the man's fitness for trial and been mentioned in the judgment.

The complainant said identification of the man as autistic in the headline and first paragraph of the article was gratuitous and implied that his condition was a contributing factor to the murder. His complaint was about the prominence of the references to autism, especially as it had not been mentioned in the judgment. The complainant said that he was autistic and after the article was published, people had spoken to him as if they thought it meant he was also capable of the kind of act described.

Taking into account the judge's earlier decision on the man's fitness to stand trial and the references to autism at that time, the Council considers that it was justifiable to make some mention of autism when reporting the outcome of the trial itself. However, the headline and the first sentence were likely to have led many readers to conclude that autism had been found to be the main cause of the murder, or at least one of the causes. Nothing in the remainder of the article would have corrected this misunderstanding.

Thursday, September 05, 2013

NY: Case puts N-word use among blacks on trial

"In a case that gave a legal airing to the debate over use of the N-word among blacks, a federal jury has rejected a black manager's argument that it was a term of love and endearment when he aimed it at a black employee.

Jurors were weighing punitive damages Tuesday after finding last week that the manager's four-minute rant was hostile and discriminatory, and awarding $250,000 in compensatory damages."

"In what is seen as a potential bellwether hearing for the nation, Massachusetts' highest court is scheduled to begin listening to the argument Wednesday that the Pledge of Allegiance, specifically the phrase, 'under God,' violates students' rights.

The Supreme Judicial Court will consider Doe v. Action-Boxborough Regional School District and it is expected to rule whether the pledge violates students’ rights."

Wednesday, September 04, 2013

Must not mention that "coming out" may upset your parents

When they see the chance of grandchildren receding, most parents would probably be upset

Margarine giant Flora has become embroiled in a homophobia row after launching an advertising campaign that appears to liken a parent's anguish at being told their child is gay to a bullet through the heart.

On a pink background, the advert depicts the words 'uhh dad, I'm gay' fashioned into the shape of a bullet as it flies through the air towards a human heart made of china.

At the bottom of the poster, next to Flora's famous logo, appear the words: 'You need a strong heart today.'

The soft-spread monger, which is owned by consumer goods firm Unilever, has come under a barrage of criticism from gay rights groups who claim the advert, which appears to have come out of South Africa, is homophobic.

Twitter came alive with anger last night as users vented their outrage at the advert's connotations.

In fact they just used children as another example where marriage would be illegal in the State

Gay marriage advocates expressed outrage on Thursday over a court document filed by lawyers for the state of Pennsylvania that likens same-sex marriage to a partnership between 12-year-olds.

Lawyers for the Pennsylvania Department of Health included the statement in their lawsuit against a county clerk who has been issuing marriage licenses to gay couples despite a state ban on same-sex nuptials.

'Had the Clerk issued marriage licenses to twelve-year-olds in violation of state law, would anyone seriously contend that each twelve-year-old has a legally enforceable "interest" in his "license" and is entitled to a hearing on the validity of his 'license,' else his due process rights be violated?' the state lawyers wrote.

Tuesday, September 03, 2013

In Obamacare, a tax is now a "shared responsibility payment"

Meanwhile, the IRS issued final rules this week regarding the individual mandate. The rules define what constitutes minimum essential coverage, the level of responsibility individuals hold for family members, and how the mandate applies to employees on union-sponsored plans and in other unique employment situations.

Interestingly, the agency, which will be responsible for making sure people comply with the new insurance rules, was careful to avoid the word "tax" when describing the penalty people face for not maintaining minimum coverage. The new euphemism of choice is "shared responsibility payment."

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts ruled in 2012 that the individual mandate was constitutional only if it was in fact a tax. But that's a politically inconvenient word and it disproves Barack Obama's claim that he isn't raising taxes on the middle class. So, "shared responsibility payment" it is.

Over at Mother Jones, Kevin Drum appears to have discovered what it is like for conservatives every single time we criticize the president:

"If you express anything short of absolute condemnation of everything the NSA has done, your Twitter feed quickly fills up with hysterical proclamations from the emo-progs that you’re a right-wing shill, a government lackey, a useful idiot for the slave state, and an obvious fool. Conversely, if you criticize the NSA’s surveillance programs, your Twitter feed quickly fills up with equally hysterical proclamations from the O-Bots that you hate Obama, you’ve always hated Obama, and you’re probably a racist swine who’s been waiting ever since 2009 for a chance to take down the nation’s first black president."

Welcome to my world, Kevin. Just so as you know, this rule goes also for Obamacare, the economy, foreign policy, firearms law, and absolutely every other area of public policy. I have been called a “racist” for so long now that I’m almost looking forward to a Hillary presidency so that I can be called a “sexist” instead.

Monday, September 02, 2013

Liverpool football club issue apology after Twitter gaffe appears to mock Munich air disaster

English soccer rivalries are serious stuff

Liverpool have issued an apology after the club's official Twitter account appeared to endorse a 'joke' about the Munich air disaster.

On Thursday evening, the club's social media team invited supporters to recommend a song that should be played as the Liverpool players walk out on to the Anfield turf to face Manchester United on Sunday.

One supporter suggested Frank Sinatra's Come Fly With Me and Eric Idle's Always Look on the Bright Side of Life, in reference to the tragic plane crash that claimed the lives of 23 people - including eight Manchester United players - in Munich in 1958.

The tragedy happened on 6 February 1958, when the plane bringing Manchester United players and staff and journalists crashed after attempting to take off in wintery conditions following a refuelling stop in Munich.

Twenty-three people - including eight United players - died and many, including manager Matt Busby, were seriously injured.

United fans have made references to the Hillsborough disaster, where 96 Liverpool fans died in tragic circumstances.

Sunday, September 01, 2013

They say the display did not "proselytize." Is this a new ACLU standard for action?

Two weeks ago, students at the Minneha Core Knowledge Magnet Elementary School in Wichita, Kansas, were greeted in the hall by this bulletin board display:

The display was later removed by the school after a brief media reaction.

PJ Media contacted Doug Bonney, legal director of the Kansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU has frequently taken action regarding similar displays regarding Christianity. Bonney said he was only peripherally aware of the issue as he is “not a blog reader,” but that he had received a brief phone call on it:

Nobody ever filed a formal complaint. I haven’t investigated, and since [the display is] down I probably won’t bother. I don’t know enough about it to know if it was objectionable or not.

However, Bonney said that the display was likely not objectionable to him, judging from the information he had:

There’s something of a fine line between teaching about religion and proselytizing. Proselytizing is, of course, prohibited.

He said a temporary display is different than a permanent display, and noted that in an educational context the display was probably acceptable. For comparison, Bonney noted that the Ten Commandments display at the University of Kansas Law School is legal because it is in context with several other displays of historical law, such as one depicting Hammurabi.

Ken Klukowski of the Family Research Council took exception to Bonney’s assertions:

[Bonney's response] is fascinating, because the ACLU routinely takes great exception to posting the Ten Commandments. They have always vehemently opposed the Ten Commandments. This is a great example of the double standard on the left.

Klukowski said the ACLU has argued that the very presence of a display of the Ten Commandments is a violation of the Establishment Clause, and that the ACLU rarely makes accusations of proselytizing.

A chip shop boss has insisted he’s not racist after putting up a banner boasting that the business now had 'English owners'.

Paul Bradbury insists customers 'want to know they are going to be served by somebody English' - even though the shop had previously been run by English people of east Asian descent and of Greek descent.

He and his wife Rachel took over the Chippy On The Green, in Hapton Road, Padiham, Lancashire less than a fortnight ago.

'People have said to us that they are glad somebody English is serving them and that the sign made them want to come in.

'They’ve never had anyone in the shop before. We are advertising that we are English.

'It doesn’t matter what colour or race you are, we’ll serve you. We welcome everyone here. I won’t be taking the sign down.

'We don’t want to upset anyone and we aren’t racist. We wouldn’t be serving foreign food if we were racist.'

The shop, which sells traditional English takeaways alongside Chinese food, kebabs and pizza, re-opened on Tuesday.

Gordon Birtwistle MP said: 'I would rather it didn’t say what it did. It would be better if it said "serving good quality food to the community". If it is causing consternation to people, it should either be taken down or changed.'

Gary Curson, a teacher at West Craven High School in Barnoldswick who lives near the shop, said he would not set foot in the takeaway again. [So who's the bigot?]

Lancashire Police say they have not yet received any complaints about the banner.

Is the American national anthem politically incorrect? From the 4th verse:Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."

Mohammad

The truth can be offensive to some but it must be said

"HATE SPEECH" is free speech: The U.S. Supreme Court stated the general rule regarding protected speech in Texas v. Johnson (109 S.Ct. at 2544), when it held: "The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Federal courts have consistently followed this. Said Virginia federal district judge Claude Hilton: "The First Amendment does not recognize exceptions for bigotry, racism, and religious intolerance or ideas or matters some may deem trivial, vulgar or profane."

Even some advocacy of violence is protected by the 1st Amendment. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously that speech advocating violent illegal actions to bring about social change is protected by the First Amendment "except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

The double standard: Atheists can put up signs and billboards saying that Christianity is wrong and that is hunky dory. But if a Christian says that homosexuality is wrong, that is attacked as "hate speech"

One for the militant atheists to consider: "...it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg" -- Thomas Jefferson

"I think no subject should be off-limits, and I regard the laws in many Continental countries criminalizing Holocaust denial as philosophically repugnant and practically useless – in that they confirm to Jew-haters that the Jews control everything (otherwise why aren’t we allowed to talk about it?)" -- Mark Steyn

Voltaire's most famous saying was actually a summary of Voltaire's thinking by one of his biographers rather than something Voltaire said himself. Nonetheless it is a wholly admirable sentiment: "I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it". I am of a similar mind.

The traditional advice about derogatory speech: "Sticks and stones will break your bones but names will never hurt you". Apparently people today are not as emotionally robust as their ancestors were.

Why conservatives should not respond to Leftist abuse: "Never wrestle with a pig, because you'll both just get dirty, and the pig likes it.”

The KKK were members of the DEMOCRATIC party. Google "Klanbake" if you doubt it

A phobia is an irrational fear, so the terms "Islamophobic" and "homophobic" embody a claim that the people so described are mentally ill. There is no evidence for either claim. Both terms are simply abuse masquerading as diagnoses and suggest that the person using them is engaged in propaganda rather than in any form of rational or objective discourse.

Leftists often pretend that any mention of race is "racist" -- unless they mention it, of course. But leaving such irrational propaganda aside, which statements really are racist? Can statements of fact about race be "racist"? Such statements are simply either true or false. The most sweeping possible definition of racism is that a racist statement is a statement that includes a negative value judgment of some race. Absent that, a statement is not racist, for all that Leftists might howl that it is. Facts cannot be racist so nor is the simple statement of them racist. Here is a statement that cannot therefore be racist by itself, though it could be false: "Blacks are on average much less intelligent than whites". If it is false and someone utters it, he could simply be mistaken or misinformed.

Categorization is a basic human survival skill so racism as the Left define it (i.e. any awareness of race) is in fact neither right nor wrong. It is simply human

Whatever your definition of racism, however, a statement that simply mentions race is not thereby racist -- though one would think otherwise from American Presidential election campaigns. Is a statement that mentions dogs, "doggist" or a statement that mentions cats, "cattist"?

If any mention of racial differences is racist then all Leftists are racist too -- as "affirmative action" is an explicit reference to racial differences

Was Abraham Lincoln a racist? "You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated." -- Spoken at the White House to a group of black community leaders, August 14th, 1862

Gimlet-eyed Leftist haters sometimes pounce on the word "white" as racist. Will the time come when we have to refer to the White House as the "Full spectrum of light" House?

The spirit of liberty is "the spirit which is not too sure that it is right." and "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." -- Judge Learned Hand

Mostly, a gaffe is just truth slipping out

Two lines below of a famous hymn that would be incomprehensible to Leftists today ("honor"? "right"? "freedom?" Freedom to agree with them is the only freedom they believe in)

First to fight for right and freedom,
And to keep our honor clean

It is of course the hymn of the USMC -- still today the relentless warriors that they always were.

It seems a pity that the wisdom of the ancient Greek philosopher Epictetus is now little known. Remember, wrote the Stoic thinker, "that foul words or blows in themselves are no outrage, but your judgment that they are so. So when any one makes you angry, know that it is your own thought that has angered you. Wherefore make it your endeavour not to let your impressions carry you away."

"Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates, and hearing all manner of reason?" -- English poet John Milton (1608-1674) in Areopagitica

Leftists can try to get you fired from your job over something that you said and that's not an attack on free speech. But if you just criticize something that they say, then that IS an attack on free speech

The intellectual Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) could have been speaking of much that goes on today when he said: "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

I despair of the ADL. Jews have enough problems already and yet in the ADL one has a prominent Jewish organization that does its best to make itself offensive to Christians. Their Leftism is more important to them than the welfare of Jewry -- which is the exact opposite of what they ostensibly stand for! Jewish cleverness seems to vanish when politics are involved. Fortunately, Christians are true to their saviour and have loving hearts. Jewish dissatisfaction with the myopia of the ADL is outlined here. Note that Foxy was too grand to reply to it.

There are also two blogspot blogs which record what I think are my main recent articles here and here. Similar content can be more conveniently accessed via my subject-indexed list of short articles here or here (I rarely write long articles these days)

NOTE: The archives provided by blogspot below are rather inconvenient. They break each month up into small bits. If you want to scan whole months at a time, the backup archives will suit better. See here or here